Some Western leaders make mistakes when they want to understand the nature of international relations by simply reading the traditional maps of geopolitics.
This misreading makes senior actors look nostalgic for the old world, its classical struggles and acknowledge that they are locked in territorial, political or strategic logic while the world has become mobile.
Its determinants transcend the boundaries of state-sovereignty, and in a continuous organization; they are determined by social movements and behaviors around the challenges of most Socio-economic development.
In contrast to the conflicts during the Cold War era and the first decade that followed, Western military power is no longer capable to solve the conflicts of the South.
Whatever the military might of a country such as the United States of America, under globalization and determinants of the present period, is no longer able to attain the traditional goals that contained old conflicts.
We have begun to see various manifestations of the weakness of powerful nations and other manifestations of the strength of weak states on the international scene.
This new weakness, among powerful actors among world states, is due to the successive crises defined by the determinants of this grand system which is covered by uncertainty in a disorderly world.
We have thus reached a new stage in which the world order has shifted from sovereignty to interdependence among nations, and from the primacy of power to the ability of weak or emerging countries to destabilize the old world order and from territorialism to permanent mobility and from the Klosevitz reading of the war based on the conflict of states to a kind of conflict based on the disintegration of the internal communities, and in the exact sense, we are witnessing the collapse of the Westphalia system established since 1648.
Countries such as Japan and China have understood these new rules. Both have been aware of the successive events that took place after the end of the Cold War.
Both succeeded in positioning themselves well in the new world order, and the processes of elusive and cautious rules, without hesitation and without any desire to dominate the other as well as deepening of new rules in reciprocal processes.
China, for example, has been able to understand globalization and enter into its systems intelligently and successfully; Beijing is not a "propitious" state that seeks to export its historical model, as Western countries such as the United States of America and France have tried to export the Western model, claiming that no country can succeed unless it adopts its intellectual, social, cultural, economic and political model. On the other hand, China, as long as its territory and sovereign interests are not affected negatively, was and is still adopting in its foreign policy on non-interference, and work quietly while avoiding problems.
It focuses on the rule that says: "economic success achieved by any state, does not mean the need to fail the other or cause its failure in the framework of bilateral "friend-enemy" situation but the optimum is 'win-win' framework".
We have heard that Japan is trying to keep the TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership) alive by pressing for a new agreement without the United States of America.
The US president withdrew from the trade agreement shortly after his inauguration. The remaining members of the TPP are: Japan, Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam, and the biggest loser in the medium and long term will be Washington.
The rule of the world according to rules, and sometimes according to the whims of world powers is no longer possible; the Western political, economic, social and cultural systems are no longer attractive and not exportable. For example, China and India alone need thousands of serious pages to understand their economic, political, social and cultural systems.
Both are succeeding today and continuing to influence the world system comfortably and without headaches in the management of the world with the least cost: they do not intervene either militarily or intelligence or institutional as America does, but interfere with its industrial strength and the competencies of its people and factors of sustainable growth.
This is the secret of the success of reading the international arena in our world today.
Follow the latest news on Google News
